Skip to main content

About your Search

20120926
20121004
Search Results 0 to 22 of about 23
to address the assembly at the opening of the term. nor own the role of foreign policy and the presidential campaign from washington journal this is 45 minutes. he is the former undersecretary of state from political affairs from 2005 to 2008. the george w. bush administration. he is teachly currently at the professor of diplomacy and international politics at harvard. thank you for joining us. >> it's a pleasure to be with you. >> thank you. you heard the speeches from new york and the play about the dualing foreign policy points. what's your take away as far as what each candidates had to say in new york? >> guest: first i think it's very interesting that foreign policy and national security issues have made a real come comeback. they are a big part of the discussion. i think it's a good thing because foreign policy is important to every single american. because we live in a globalized world. i thought president obama gave a thoughtful and he focused 0 the middle east and the tragic events that took place two weeks ago of this week. the assassination of our ambassador in libya and three o
then the foreign policy. but we interviewed most of the women in the book. on the senate of foreign relations committee. but standing next to the generals and elizabeth dole said it almost wrecked my car after the iowa straw poll when elizabeth did well. they had around to it -- roundtable the next morning to talk about her surprising strong finish but she was there a lot with her husband was there. she has no commander-in-chief background. what has she done? i almost wrecked my car at that point*. >> women have to worry about being too feminine. either way they go there are problems. men have to worry about appearing to feminine but no one will say he is too masculine. it is a lot more complicated. but to be more aggressive to be labeled in some way. there are barriers that where they are caught were men are free to move. >> also those surrogates elizabeth dole was a good example she had her own plane and crisscross the country by have not seen the male spouse at the caliber of the women we have had. it is fair to say bill clinton was hillary clinton's best ally and worst detractor. also bob
interested in foreign policy and even issues like the defense budget? and that's why issues like that and the onces we don't know about that make me wary of all these straight line projections we're make in the future based on what things look like right now. >> anyone want to address the point? >> which point? >> the point about . >> pick on any of the points. i meant the point about iran and the likely hood we would enter in to military action there regardless of who wins. [inaudible] >> question from the audience? >> yes, sir. front row. >> microphone approaching you from the left. governor romney said he wants to create 12 million jobs during his term, that's 250,000 jobs a month. in the past, the u.s. has always been an exporter. and that was what created jobs. how do you see his promise of creating 12 million jobs in four years? >> unlikely. [laughter] >> okay. that's one view. anybody want to elaborate on that? >> look, i think we are in a completely different, you know, job market. we're about -- a few weeks during the convention which is bill clinton lineback in 1990 if
d date will focus on foreign policy. earlier this week the carnegie endowment for peace posted a discussion on the president's role in leading foreign policy. they talked about challenges facing the u.s. including american influence and engagement globally, the changing international order and emerging nations. two of the featured panelists included thomas friedman, "new york times" foreign affairs columnist and author of "the world is flat." and jessica mathews, carnegie president and director of national security office of global issues. >> good evening. my name is david rothkopf, and i will be the moderator for this evening. in the carnegie endowment discussion about how should the next american president engage the world. this is a debate format discussion. we have a terrific group of panelists here. starting on the far right we have professor john ikenberry of princeton. next is tom friedman of the new york times. next to him is our own jessica matthews of the carnegie endowment, and beside jessica is bob kagan at the brookings institution and we are going to cover several
handling his foreign policy correctly with respect to is ralph. >> sufficient and respectful to the jewish community. >> right. with respect specifically to his support for israel. then he said, well, i eventually met with president obama, and the very much solicited my support. i decided to support him again. >> your briefing it too quickly. >> i want to step in here because it was apparently just last week that you delivered a speech at a synagogue. today in michael good ones column i continue that discussion. the new york post. >> and this is a discussion in which your yet again critical of the obama administration. >> i have never seen a perfect candidate, and that never had a perfect and it. i wasn't perfect. and i will always speak out. but if you read the article today, my other utterances, it has always been stated that i am still on the obama train. i will explain why. >> we would definitely like you to do that. first specifically at think would you address last week was the question of the red line. >> not so much the red. >> tell us what you said last week. >> okay. i was incens
up with several points. one of them spoke to foreign policy. touched a little at the beginning but how do you describe your foreign policy? how should america face or approach the world? >> guest: well, just that we shouldn't involve ourselves diplomatically. we should be the shining beacon on the hill. but our military interventions, would we're going in and determining -- we're replacing one dictator for another dictator? foreign aid is money spent on dictators in foreign governments. it's not spent on people in other countries. it's spent on propping up other governments. here we are funding funding fune insurgents in syria, and a quart of the insurgents are supposed to be al qaeda? didn't we do this in afghanistan? didn't we really ultimately bank role osama bin laden? we haven't learned anything. what we aught -- ought to have learned is military interventions make enemies to the united states of people that are affected by these. these drone strikes? yeah, we hit the target but we wipe out another quarter block. we kill tens of thousands of innocent civilians living in th
of staff to vice president quayle and secretary of education bill bennett. he also served as foreign policy adviser to senator john mccain. i'm sure all of you see built regularly on "fox news sunday" and the fox news channel. i actually met bill in 1981 when he was a very young, assistant professor at the university of pennsylvania. it's been great to see all the things he has accomplished since that time. so the questions i'd like to pose for each of you come and i'll start with governor huntsman, what does the 2012 election reveal about the respected leadership styles of obama and romney? >> probably not much at this point. >> well, this panel is over. [laughter] >> see you later. >> so you can extrapolate a few things from president obama's first term that might be instructive. he isn't a manager. he is not come he doesn't have a history of managing things, so you bring in a lot of good well-trained smart people, given the tasks and you try to lead a government. and in the case of governor romney, who has been a governor, who is a business guy, he's run the olympics. i think his attitud
-span.org. >> next, three former obama administration pentagon officials defend the president's foreign policy and national security record while criticizing mitt romney. moderated by former cnn, cnn contributor bill schneider, the discussion focuses largely on iran's nuclear program and america's presence in afghanistan. this event, which took place yesterday, runs about an hour, and we'll show you as of this as we can until the pentagon briefing scheduled at 2 p.m. eastern. >> struggling in, and you're encouraged to help yourself to coffee, food, whatever you need. my name's mike bennett, on behalf of my colleagues, jim kessler -- who's here somewhere -- sean gibbons and mika, welcome to another anti-politics press breakfast. before i hand it over to bill, i just had a couple of things we wanted to talk about relating to our work on national security. as mitt romney discovered on september 11th of this year, nothing has the power to shake up a presidential race like a change in national security. and that can be either an external event as we had in libya and egypt, or it can be a political
for foreign policy analysis. i wonder if the new leadership in china and the relatively new leadership in north korea provide us with opportunities whether we can create opportunities for the cooperation and engagement. >> i think for china that is definitely the case. obviously that is not new leadership either to china or to us. many of those individuals we have known and worked with in the past and they have all indicated not only their willingness to their desire to continue to develop this relationship in a positive way economically, politically, but for us in the defense department and in the security cents. in the north -- north korea we will have to see. we have remained very concerned about so many dimensions, and that is one of the reasons why we are so intent upon solidifying our posture, and that's the reason why we are looking at a number of steps in korea but i'm sure you are familiar with but i will remind you of what is going on. there we are making our presence, particularly the ground force presence putting it on a more permanent basis and more solid basis. that is wh
is that i'm professor of american foreign policy at the johns hopkins school of advanced international studies in washington. we teach graduate students. i have wonderful students from all over the world. students come from all over the world to study here because this is america, and they know that there is something special about america, and we wrote this book to try to make sure that in the future, students from all over the world and people and entrepreneurs and immigrants from all over the world will continue to come here, that this will remain a special place. >> host: tom, is, of course, the "new york times" columnist, pulitzer prize winner three times. how did you team up? >> guest: we're old friends and neighbors and we called each other and talked about the world, but we noticed something in recent years. we started talking about the world, but we ended every day talking about america. it was apparent to us that america, its future and vitality is the biggest foreign policy issue in the world. that's how we wrote the book together. >> host: "that used to be us" is the name o
. the only foreign policy he has succeeded at killing bin laden. >> host: i also think that president obama has actually been on the same page where americans are in terms of iraq, drawing down, but as you said, that's not what a leader does. >> guest: we need to select in the side. we have a crisis in europe which can affect us. the crisis of the dollar, the jobless priceless here. there are a lot of causes the president had picked up would resonate with the public instead of taking obscure bits from the progressive wishlist like health care reform. >> host: we have only a few minutes left. tell us about your biggest conclusions and what you might do next. >> guest: this book was -- when you write a book coming to enter big questions. you're going to play detective for a year or so. you want to spend some time really thinking about this. this came as a great surprise me. i was expecting to find something very different. i was expecting to find a much more determined leader, someone who indicates a new generation in american politics. if you look at the debates in 2008 between john mccain a
about the issue of presidential power with regard to foreign policy, military policy but let me say my primary interest in the book and my remarks this evening is more domestic policy and the extent to which elections do or do not bring us close to resolving important issues of domestic public policy. for the older members of this audience there have been at least one election that did fundamentally change america and that is 1954. a mere 48 years ago, when all of the stars were aligned and not only to create a landslide victory for president lyndon johnson, richard nixon got a landslide victory in 1972, but a landslide democratic majority in the house and senate and let us not forget a supreme court of the united states that was still fairly and the control of liberal democrats. 4 two brief shining years or perhaps baleful years if you don't like the great society but for two years for better or for worse the united states had a government in the way that we often seek of her majesty, having a government that is a group of people who can implement a party platform that can be judged a
anything wrong with it. on issue after issue, foreign policy or anything else, we divide into these parties. first of all, there is nothing in the constitution that creates political parties and nothing that creates political primaries and allows political parties and party bosses and legislatures to talk congressional district lines. let me talk a little bit about that. because by identifying what the problem is, you can see where the solution is. and i do believe that our solutions are there. very quickly, let me talk about the primary system. you know, a lot of you in this room, there are a lot of you i don't know, but i know something about everybody in this room. you all believe that when you go to the store and you buy a cell phone, when you buy a book, you want choice. that is what we are. we want choice and things that we get and did things that we think and do things that we really want choice is for. the only place where we have devised a system to stifle choice is in selecting the people who are going to decide whether to go to war, when our taxes are going to be, what programs w
reach its foreign policy goals while under the wing of the united states which he says count always have israel's -- doesn't always have israel's best interests at heart. this is just under an hour. [applause] >> shalom, good evening, everybody. it is my pleasure to be here with you, especially when you have such great weather in washington. almost like jerusalem at this time of the year. i am very happy to see so many people coming and showing an interest in my book, and i would like in the next 20 minutes to share with you not what you're going to read in the book, but what's behind the ideas. but first i want to think we all can agree that's what's happening in israel is important to the people who live in the united states of america. why? because we share the same values, the same principles, the same heritage and the same enemies. and because we are in the middle east today being attacked, so you have to ask yourself why those people are against the jewish nation in the middle east. the arab against israel not because of the land that we so-called occupied. we are being attacked be
't usually want to be boxed in on foreign policy. it was a rather tight commitment that mitt romney made with a donor nodding in the front row. i was troubled by that as if he makes a commitment to end investigations against edelson. i had an argument with mine, is he more interested in destroying unions or supporting, you know, he has other priorities as well. i don't think it matters. i don't think the rules have to be that clear. the rules are you want to create a structure where elected officials are not wholly dependent on a given -- not largely dependent on a given donor. one of the principles i always use is you want them to be in a situation where if they're in office and that donor comes back and says i really want x, y, z, the elected official can say, as senator mccain famously did, get out of my office. and if you can't because that money is fundamentally important to your campaign, you have a problem. and that's the case for rules. >> so there i would make the republican plea for judicial modesty and say, look, this is complicated. the discussion we've had indicates there's
there as well. the united states foreign policy towards the persian gulf has for decades focused squarely on ensuring the free flow of oil from the gulf to the aborted and the soviet union but in recent decades. our concern to the region has embroiled us in the two wars in the past 20 years and led to a significant military commitment of military assets in the region and the question arises almost immediately why does the united states expand such efforts and so much of its assets. we are in fact a number three we'll producer in the world and when we import less than 20% of our crude imports from the gulf. so these issues we are going to explores the global energy market, the changing place changing is the persian gulf oil and gas still important and likely to be in the future where the shiastan index in the immediate region when the impact on the region's ability to produce. we have the very distinguished panelists. on my right, dr. jean-francois seznec currently adjunct professor at georgetown university. and for the previous ten years, dr. seznec was visiting professor of georgetown un
debate is october 22 from lynn university in florida, and the questions turn to foreign policy. live on c-span, c-span radio, and also online at c-span.org. up next, a discussion on the health care law presidential candidate mitt romney signed into law in 2006 when he was governor of massachusetts from this morning's "washington journal." >> host: a reporter of the "boston herald" talking about the health care bill mitt romney signed in 2006. thank you for joining us. >> guest: good morning. >> host: give us the basics, first of all, back in time to the debate happening in massachusetts. what was governor romney's role in getting the health care law pushed and signed? was he the one who initiated the process? >> guest: it was a massive bipartisan effort, involved politicians, business leaders, small business owners, but he was the governor at the time, and he was the one who effectively signed it into law, and as a backdrop, which probably everybody here knows pretty well, we, as a nation, are dealing with ever increasing health care costs, and as the health care costs go up, we're also d
at the issue of foreign policy in this year's campaign. our guest is nicholas burt, former undersecretary of state for political affairs. political science professor at norfolk state university will focus on the role of virginia in the election and a history of the african-american vote in virginia. we will also be joined by editor in chief of the washington monthly to discuss recent articles in the magazine examining the consumer financial protection bureau. live on c-span every day at 7:00 a.m. eastern. >> i watched c-span every time, especially when i really pay attention the most. any time something is going on i want to watch c-span because they typically have the best, most unbiased view of whatever is happening. if i want to get spun in a circle of watch one of the other news organizations. i love c-span. watch on tv, on line. if something's going on now want to know what's happening al west and to c-span. don't know that i have a favorite show. for me it is always just anytime i need to know what's going on i know that c-span will have the real story of what's been happening. >> j
those made about the domestic and foreign policies. in the united states and in europe. their voices are not heard, even if they constitute 99% of the society's. human and ethical values are sacrificed in order to -- and their willingness to listen to the demands of the people has become only a two at a time in election. the current world order is -- and based on injustice. distinguished friends and colleagues, what should be done and what is the way out of the current situation? there is no doubt that the world is in need of a new order and a fresh way of thinking, in order in which man is recognized as god's supreme creation enjoying material and the spiritual qualities and possessing a divine nation filled with a desire to see justice. an order that aims to revive human dignity and believes in universal happiness and perfection. three, in order which is at peace, security and welfare for all walks of life around the globe. four, in order found upon trust in order. rulers must love -- five, a just and fair order in which everybody is equal before love and in which there is no -- le
of american public opinion on foreign policy which just came out recently there were some very strange attitudes of americans regarding the middle east. there was a large majority of people saw the middle east as the region of the world most likely to create threats to the national security of the united states. and yet there was a general trend of wanting less involvement militarily, economically and so forth with this region. so i think along with what damon said, public opinion and how voters and citizens feel about the involvement of their countries in the middle east is another issue. >> certain detail, very tricky dick the european union is going to disappear. it will continue without any doubt, even the eurozone. this is my position. now, for us, that part of the world, this part of the world we are talking about, is our neighborhood, southern neighborhood. and, therefore, the stability there is for migration, many things are related to that, mediterranean sea. so for us has to be a priority. and it will be a priority for ever. we will do it properly. we will do it properly, do
generations. it's become a national security issue and a foreign policy issue. what specific steps do you propose the united states take to get out of debt or at least make our interest payment issue to live with? berkley: all right, look, we have to get our debt under control, and wasteful spending. and this is the way we do it. the first thing we do is stop giving tax breaks to corporations that are shipping our jobs overseas. my opponent voted five times for the. we've got to stop giving big oil tax subsidy. they don't need. the big guys don't need. people of the state of nevada need to help, the wall street, not wall street corporations. and then after we do that we can make nevada and this country for clean energy jobs capital of the world so we can be generating good paying jobs. you want to get down our debt? let's get people back to work so they're paying taxes. and another thing we can do when it comes to our debt is to pass a balanced budget amendment. and let me tell you what that does. i want to pass a balanced budget amendment but i'm not going to pass an amendment, i'm not g
configuration may not be understood. or the risk of leaked intellectual property to foreign businesses and governments. when it comes to articulating the failure of policy on the subject, particularly as a relate its to cyberspace. one look no further than the panel that is here with me today to give you a sense of the potential devastating consequencingses. the second key feature is linked to the one i described is the the increasingly many of the segments vital to defense are commercial in nature. this is a threand department the is frankly more willing to recognize in policy than in practice. i would hasrd a to guess 25 years ago, nearly 70% of the defense the department procured were developmented and produced for the develop. today, i would suggest that the ratio has reversed with roughly 70 percent of the goods and services now either produced for commercial consumption or originally developed with commercial applications in mind as well as a largely commercial base supply chain. this is a very difficult concept for many in our business to get they're their arms around. frankly t
. as well as the risk of leak intellectual property to foreign business and government. when it comes to articulating the real-world risks of a failed to defend a policy on the subject, particularly as it relates to cyberspace, one look no further than the panel that is here with me today to give you a sense of the potential devastating conflict. the second key feature is linked to the one i just described is increasing and many of our segments vital to this segment are commercial in nature. will rely upon commercial design components. this is a transit department is frankly been more willing to recognize in policy than in practice. i would hazard to guess that 25 years ago nearly 70% of the goods and services the department prepared what he felt exclusively for the department. today, i would suggest that the racial has reversed with roughly 70% of the goods and services now i to produce for commercial consumption or originally developed for a commercial application in mind. as was a largely commercial base supply chain. this is a very difficult concept for many and a business to get
Search Results 0 to 22 of about 23